suspended with the help of a phone

jimbo79

here is an interesting story that may have wider reaching consequences, during a recent carlow sfc semi between rathvilly and palatine an incident occurred where a rathvilly player received a head injury during play, i was at the game myself but didn't see what happened as the ball was in play and there was a mass of bodies around, but the injuried part claimed he had been hit by one of the palatine players, the ref could not have seen it from his position as his view was obscured, one of the linesmen probably should have seen it as it was quite close to him, some fans in the stand claimed to have seen it, but as no official seen it no action could be taken

palatine win the game, but the following monday a link to a video taken by a phone is posted of a gaa site, this link brings you to someones facebook account and i'd imagine it got some amount of hits for the few hours it was up, this video then vanishes, but rumour has it that it was going to be sent to the county board, and for once rumour was indeed fact and last night the offending player was banned for a month, it seems the rathvilly club did not want to take it any further but other sources passed this evidence on

im a bit conflicted on this one, having seen the video myself, it was nasty and could have resulted in a serious eye injury if it had been an inch lower, and part of me says he got exactly what he deserved while im also left thinking are we opening a pandoras box when this sort of evidence is used

opinions?

Clareman

As a Clare man I'm all for people to be suspended if evidence is used, it's when people are banned without evidence I get upset

Jogathon

It's definite evidence, it definitely happened. So it's more reliable than any written report from a referee. Use it, and use it frequently and these incidents are less likely to happen. Also, the referee won't be abused/accused of over-reacting/having it in for one GAA club if there is clear footage.

Win win situation in my opinion.

Tom Joad

If it cuts down on some of the nastier off the ball incidents that happen in some games why not use it - might send out a message that you cannot hit someone off the ball and expect to get away with it..

jimbo79

yeah pretty much my own feelings on it, i just have this niggling doubt that if the video had shown a player to be innocent that it may not be accepted, i know some county boards will only except full recordings a evidence

ft9

Clareman wrote: »

As a Clare man I'm all for people to be suspended if evidence is used, it's when people are banned without evidence I get upset

Trying to think of such an incident involving Clare but can't. I'm sure there's relevance?

jimbo79

ft9 wrote: »

Trying to think of such an incident involving Clare but can't. I'm sure there's relevance?

colin lynch? could be way off the mark though

Clareman

Nope, that was it, 98 Lynch was suspended for something that happened off the ball and independent witnesses were brought in to sy what they said, Clare's witnesses who saw nothing weren't used, I believe the rules were changed after that to say that video or official reports could only be used.

mooonpie

If there's evidence there, use it. Shouldn't matter if it's recorded by a phone or an RTE camera, if the evidence is clear then I've no problem.

Having said that, I can understand why they might insist on full recording. It's fierce easy to cut the start or end of a recording of a single incident to only tell half the story.

On evidence being used to prove someone's innocence - in order to prove someone innocent they have to be found guilty first. The ref would have been the one to find them guilty, so that means overruling the ref's decision ... something the GAA really doesn't like doing

jimbo79

Clareman wrote: »

Nope, that was it, 98 Lynch was suspended for something that happened off the ball and independent witnesses were brought in to sy what they said, Clare's witnesses who saw nothing weren't used, I believe the rules were changed after that to say that video or official reports could only be used.

ah yeah i remember that now, that debate raged for much of the summer

jimbo79

moonpie9588 wrote: »

If there's evidence there, use it. Shouldn't matter if it's recorded by a phone or an RTE camera, if the evidence is clear then I've no problem.

Having said that, I can understand why they might insist on full recording. It's fierce easy to cut the start or end of a recording of a single incident to only tell half the story.

On evidence being used to prove someone's innocence - in order to prove someone innocent they have to be found guilty first. The ref would have been the one to find them guilty, so that means overruling the ref's decision ... something the GAA really doesn't like doing

in this case they couldn't have cut it to make it any worse or better, what is unusual is that it seems the injured player and his club were not the ones to make the complaint, they were going to leave it be, it should make for an interesting county final sunday if there is one

you are correct about the evidence been used to prove someones innocence, it's very rare that happens

keane2097

This sort of thing is a slippery slope, where people with particular unknowable agendas can anonymously email selected bits of footage to governing bodies to suit their own ends.

This sort of thing happened in golf a few times a couple of years ago where people watching super slow motion replays spotted transgressions, emailed the tv stations and had players DQ'd. Happened to Harrington in one event.

Open to all sorts of abuse from gambling POVs as well as opposition teams wanting to get players banned, and the golf authorities saw this and rightly changed their policy to rule out evidence acquired in this way.

Imagine a county final ending in a draw and the GAA get an edited video from one team with a highlight reel of only the opposition resulting in players getting banned for the replay.

This isn't the way to go IMO.

premierstone

Clareman wrote: »

Nope, that was it, 98 Lynch was suspended for something that happened off the ball and independent witnesses were brought in to sy what they said, Clare's witnesses who saw nothing weren't used, I believe the rules were changed after that to say that video or official reports could only be used.

14 Years Clareman, build a bridge FFS

ozymandias10

premierstone wrote: »

14 Years Clareman, build a bridge FFS

in fairness clare were forced into giving Offaly a replay on the basis that lynch would not be suspended. They agreed but lynch was suspended ..Offaly went on and won the All ireland

premierstone

ozymandias10 wrote: »

in fairness clare were forced into giving Offaly a replay on the basis that lynch would not be suspended. They agreed but lynch was suspended ..Offaly went on and won the All ireland

Lynch was suspended for an incidednt in the Munster Championship V Waterford, well before the Offaly game/replay.

Lynch was suspended on foot on independent witness reports which in itself was dubious to say the least but anyone that witnessed he's carry on during and before the throw in at the start of that match would agree the man was out of control that day, he actually hit all three of the other midfielders before the ball was thrown in, including Ollie Baker.

Clareman

The throw in was nothing to do with the sending off, in fact that was mentioned in the refs report so it couldn't be actioned by the central council afterwards. The man was given a 6 months suspension for something that wasn't witnessed by anyone in any authority during the game. Ollie actually got the worst belt of anyone

Tipperary Stonethrower

jimbo79 wrote: »

here is an interesting story that may have wider reaching consequences, during a recent carlow sfc semi between rathvilly and palatine an incident occurred where a rathvilly player received a head injury during play, i was at the game myself but didn't see what happened as the ball was in play and there was a mass of bodies around, but the injuried part claimed he had been hit by one of the palatine players, the ref could not have seen it from his position as his view was obscured, one of the linesmen probably should have seen it as it was quite close to him, some fans in the stand claimed to have seen it, but as no official seen it no action could be taken

palatine win the game, but the following monday a link to a video taken by a phone is posted of a gaa site, this link brings you to someones facebook account and i'd imagine it got some amount of hits for the few hours it was up, this video then vanishes, but rumour has it that it was going to be sent to the county board, and for once rumour was indeed fact and last night the offending player was banned for a month, it seems the rathvilly club did not want to take it any further but other sources passed this evidence on

im a bit conflicted on this one, having seen the video myself, it was nasty and could have resulted in a serious eye injury if it had been an inch lower, and part of me says he got exactly what he deserved while im also left thinking are we opening a pandoras box when this sort of evidence is used

opinions?

My latest information is that the Palatine player in question was cleared last night by the Hearings Committee.

68Murph68

jimbo79 wrote: »

here is an interesting story that may have wider reaching consequences, during a recent carlow sfc semi between rathvilly and palatine an incident occurred where a rathvilly player received a head injury during play, i was at the game myself but didn't see what happened as the ball was in play and there was a mass of bodies around, but the injuried part claimed he had been hit by one of the palatine players, the ref could not have seen it from his position as his view was obscured, one of the linesmen probably should have seen it as it was quite close to him, some fans in the stand claimed to have seen it, but as no official seen it no action could be taken

palatine win the game, but the following monday a link to a video taken by a phone is posted of a gaa site, this link brings you to someones facebook account and i'd imagine it got some amount of hits for the few hours it was up, this video then vanishes, but rumour has it that it was going to be sent to the county board, and for once rumour was indeed fact and last night the offending player was banned for a month, it seems the rathvilly club did not want to take it any further but other sources passed this evidence on

im a bit conflicted on this one, having seen the video myself, it was nasty and could have resulted in a serious eye injury if it had been an inch lower, and part of me says he got exactly what he deserved while im also left thinking are we opening a pandoras box when this sort of evidence is used

opinions?

Massively in favour. Any county board who doesn't use footage is massively backward.

It punishes the dirty players and rewards the clean players and that has to be a good thing.

Would love to set up some games with cameras and directional mics on every player. Logistically very difficult but would be fun to see.

I often think that Kerry missed a trick by not having a camera on Gooch full-time over the years. Would have seriously hampered a number of his markers.

Fighting Irish

in for video

jimbo79

Tipperary Stonethrower wrote: »

My latest information is that the Palatine player in question was cleared last night by the Hearings Committee.

correct, meant to update this but haven't been on all day, not sure what grounds he was cleared on yet